Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Cover 1: Kevon Seymour Analysis Article


Saca312

Recommended Posts

On 9/3/2017 at 2:11 PM, Zithers said:

My analysis: The Panthers just traded for a dude who lost the nickel job to Leonard Johnson, a guy we valued so much that we didn't re-sign him.

You clearly don't understand scheme fits. McDermott comes in and implements his scheme over Rex's, and Seymour isn't a fit at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/2/2017 at 7:13 PM, Mr. Scot said:

Darrelle Revis, Assante Samuel, Nnamdi Ashomugah and others have suffered poor seasons or outright downfalls by going to teams with poor scheme fits for their talents.

Better hope our scheme under Wilks is different enough from McDermott to work for this guy.

Let's hope it's not too different it effects Bradberry. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, shaqattaq said:

True, but we're not looking for a nickel, we're looking for a guy that can play outside so that Captain doesn't have to come outside if something happens to Worley or Bradberry.

Seymour's arms are nearly 3 inches shorter than Worley's and Bradberry's. Dude doesn't seem to fit our profile of lengthy outside corners. His measureables are much closer to Elder and Sanchez, guys who we tested in the nickel... so I'm really not sure that's what the angle is, unless Hurney/a coach said otherwise when asked about it.

 

6 hours ago, Saca312 said:

You clearly don't understand scheme fits. McDermott comes in and implements his scheme over Rex's, and Seymour isn't a fit at all.

... then why would we trade for him when Rivera/Wilks and McDermott share similar schemes?

Look, we dumped a 6th wideout no one had heard of before a couple months ago and a 7th rounder for this guy. Don't get your hopes up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Zithers said:

Seymour's arms are nearly 3 inches shorter than Worley's and Bradberry's. Dude doesn't seem to fit our profile of lengthy outside corners. His measureables are much closer to Elder and Sanchez, guys who we tested in the nickel... so I'm really not sure that's what the angle is, unless Hurney/a coach said otherwise when asked about it.

 

... then why would we trade for him when Rivera/Wilks and McDermott share similar schemes?

Look, we dumped a 6th wideout no one had heard of before a couple months ago and a 7th rounder for this guy. Don't get your hopes up.

I'm definitely not getting my hopes up. And I realize that he is smaller than G-man liked for CB's.  But, and I say this with all sincerity, I died a little inside every time Teddy Williams didn't get cut. At least Seymour's a young guy with room to improve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • excellent points and insights.  I agree on Tepper.  I guess I worry that his questions and comments might influence the thinking of his employees, that his presence in the room might add pressure to an already stressful situation, but after watching it again, it does not appear to be like that.  Morgan was in charge.  Canales mentioned needing a center, but beyond that, he was there to serve as a consultant, more or less, if asked.  I suppose my point was this--everyone knew their roles, I did not see egos--I saw empowerment.  As for Morgan--I saw a leader that listened to others, made wise decisions, and never lost control.  I was VERY IMPRESSED with Dan Morgan. 
    • Pretty good summation, although I would caution just a bit that there might be a little of over-enhanced expectations. I do agree with the assessment on BPA. It was exceedingly clear they had a specific shopping list. Early on when there was some discussion about the tackles available, Morgan was asked if he was willing to give up a 5th to get Freeling, if it came to that. I think the only way it wasn't a left tackle with that 1st pick is if none that were valued as a 1st were still available.
    • a) That they made it a point in the room to point at the paper and say, "hope the camera got that" suggests we really did target the players we wanted and got them. While there is a ton of editing happening to cut out conversations not related to the players we picked, there didn't seem to be a lot of panic about who/what was going on b) Tepper appreciates the analytics. Now that he has a few years to see how the front office team works together to do the analysis, it still looks like he's hands-off (he's learned his lesson??). He seemed less vocal than in previous years' Blueprints (at least, in the edit).  I wouldn't expect Canales to be overly vocal in the draft room - he's likely already made his opinions known behind the scenes about certain players. Draft day is Morgan and Tilis and Eager's day. Loved seeing their interactions/conversations  c) that's all Eager. There's a great piece somewhere about the analytics engine he built floating around somewhere (maybe it was just after the draft?), and how he's constantly tweaking it with info about the players and input from the coaching staff.  That the post-draft press - for the most part - all seem to be overly positive about the draft actions we had compared to other teams makes it seem like we've gotten the ship moving in the right direction. Whether it translates to on-field results, well, that's a different topic for hundreds of other threads
×
×
  • Create New...